wrong, trashbum.

your tweet shitpost does not pertain to censorship whatsoever. Under current leftist rules, sPeEcH hAs CoNsEqUeNceS, therefore defamation lawsuits against those who purposefully lie, are everywhere around us.

Dont get mad and triggered & start crying when people start using same rules your radical-extremist far-left team created, against you.



no lies were used when non-lying scumbags provide their take on the situation that is fully recorded on video:
1) white house is the authority controling the microphone at the white house press events.
2) acosta used physicality to oppose the rightful authority of the white house



documented pathological liars absolutely deserve all the scrutiny, no matter how many agenda-driven spindoctors like yourself try manufacture their innocence

I can read all your posts. I just often times dont have the motivation to do that or to even engage with them.

To your point: Imho, there is a fine line between ranting against the media or suggesting courts to look at questionable behavior from the media on the one side, and implying that "they criticize me - cant be legal, must be sued" on the other side. The former is testing and double-checking the boundaries of free spreech, the latter is an utterly authoritarian, anti-free speech approach/mindset.

This post was edited by Black XistenZ on Dec 19 2018 09:23am

and like i pointed out, it was NOT the first and only time trump suggested the latter, so that excuse has been debunked.



also, describing this administrations coordinated and repeated attacks as 'enemy of the people' - of course exclusively against media critical of the president - as merely 'ranting' has to be the understatement of the year. not surprising considering where it's coming from, but if you want to pretend to be objective and reasonable on this one, you'll have to admit that this certainly crosses the line of just a rant. trump is forcefeeding his followers with that narrative and a significant portion of them uncritically accept it, while ironically being completely fine with his DAILY lies...

at what point is is appropriate to legally challenge = I will follow the legal avenues, but not sure if we're there yet, what do you all think.

if that's authoritarianism to you i'm starting to understand why your ancestors had such a hard time stopping your hero in the 30s.

This post was edited by thesnipa on Dec 19 2018 09:35am

exactly. "challenge their license" = "I think they've gone to far, but that's up to the courts to decide".
this is a sharp contrast to the more recent "they criticize me - cant be legal" tweet.

fender is all about "facts" when he has a quarter of a point, and the rest of the time he operates on "intent" that only he is qualified to judge.

and then the dogs all claimed that they didn't hear any whistles and all just gathered by chance...

i'm wondering, at what point is it appropriate to call you a brownshirt? don't get me wrong, i'm not saying you are, just definitely saying it's 'bad for country' - but context of course doesn't matter...

bad for country from a politician is empty rhetoric 101. jesus u don't take people even close to face value, you just ascribe the worst possible context even if it's "debunked" by the rest of the tweet itself.

im just laughing wondering how long you had that blank sitting in the chamber. what an underwhelming attempt.

president threatens to maybe at some point legally challenge something =/= dog whistling to be the next hitler. Winston Churchill is belly laughing in the grave you soft arrogant imbecile.

thus far he has been check and balanced at pretty much all points where he has actually gone too far

He's a big man baby that runs his mouth but as long as he gets checked (and he has) what is there to do?

I've been all over the -enemy of the people- bullshit since day one but as long as he doesn't act on it illegally and get away with it he can keep running his mouth

This post was edited by Beowulf on Dec 19 2018 09:57am

the dog whistles bring in the dogs but doesn't guarentee them a meal. the longer they go unfed the more restless the dogs get.

this of course serves Fender, trump's dogs eventually turning on him like Ramsay Bolton is what he wants afterall. but it's not on his NPC script so he can't possibly accept it to be true.

This post was edited by thesnipa on Dec 19 2018 10:01am